West Ham United‘s bid to secure new ownership has suffered a setback due to recent developments in French football. The club, particularly receptive to investment with Vanessa Gold, daughter of the late David Gold, willing to sell a sizeable stake, now faces a smaller pool of potential buyers.
Earlier efforts to raise funds, including Karren Brady’s trip to the Middle East, proved unsuccessful. Now, a glimmer of hope for French clubs, with Ligue 1 securing a long-awaited domestic TV deal, has inadvertently squeezed West Ham’s options.
The £420 million agreement with DAZN and BeIN Sports, while less than half of what Ligue 1 initially sought, offers French clubs financial stability. Consequently, wealthy owners previously considering leaving French football are more likely to stay, reducing the number of potential investors for West Ham.
West Ham’s valuation is estimated to be around £800 million, potentially reaching £850-900 million. Whether a complete takeover or a partial sale is on the cards remains unclear. However, David Sullivan’s decision to negotiate a full takeover option with Czech billionaire Daniel Kretinsky (who currently owns 27% of the club) suggests an eventual exit for the current ownership group.
The situation is further muddied by the introduction of a new independent regulator for English football. This body, vehemently opposed by the Irons, could introduce stricter ownership regulations that might discourage foreign investment. The drawn-out takeover saga at Everton exemplifies the complexities involved in such deals.
The French TV deal and the uncertainties surrounding the new regulator create a challenging landscape for the club. It will be interesting to see if the Hammers can navigate these hurdles and secure the investment they desire.
I’ve already replied to someone else who wrote the exact same article on C&H as it’s the only site I comment on.
A regulator is required to protect fans and clubs from dodgy owners. This includes having the clubs crest and identify being protected, ring any bells?
If more stringent tests are applied then it prevents owners without the required finance in place putting clubs at risk.
Sullivan is obviously against it as it will hurt his pockets. With PSR rules the days of Roman at Chelski buying whoever are gone.
I’d rather have peace of mind that any new owner had the finances and hopefully commercial awareness to take us on to greater achievements.
I disagree with your assumptions that Kretinsky negotiated what would eventually be a buy out deal with Sullivan.
The first option Kretinsky took on Sullivan’s shares is probably nothing more than his assured protection as a minority shareholder.
Imagine that Sullivan got a £1billion offer to sell his majority shareholding after Kretinsky’s investing in WHU? All Kretinsky is doing is ensuring that any potential buyer has to negotiate the price for a buy out with the 2nd largest shareholder that also holds a “first option” on Sullivan’s shares at an agreed price.
Surely that’s a more likely reason for Kretinsky having first option on Sullivan’s shares?
Everton’s problems stemmed from what I read about from different sources was that 777 were somewhat not as wealthy as they made us believe they were.
Hopefully we’ll find a buyer soon for Vanessa’ 10% that is up for sale.
As for the new regulators, I’m sure they won’t last too long like the other attempts to tell football clubs how the best way to spend their millions is.